On Sun, Jul 15, 2001 at 09:10:03PM -0500, Eric A. Hall wrote:
> "Adam M. Costello" wrote:
> >
> > Martin Duerst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > But the current IDNA draft explicitly specifies that zone files
must
> > > be in ACE, and therefore prohibits such implementations.
> >
> > Well that's just silly.  Paul and Patrick, the IDNA spec should not
say
> > that master files must use ACE, it should say that DNS servers must
> > accept master files that use ACE and may also accept master files
that
> > use other encodings, like UTF-8.
>
> The format of a master file needs to be agreed on. This is required
for
> DNS to operate properly.

Uhm, no.

Please don't suggest repeating the bind-centric mistakes in the current
set of DNS RFCs.

Master file format is just an implementation detail. It can easily
differ
from one implementation to another.

Cheers,
  Steve
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sun Jul 15 20:45:08 2001
Received: from vix.samspade.org ([204.152.186.148] helo=blighty.com)
by psg.com with esmtp (Exim 3.31 #1)
id 15LzJk-000CLd-00
for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 20:45:08 -0700
Received: by blighty.com (Postfix, from userid 1000)
id 5A5C2634; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 21:09:01 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2001 21:09:01 -0700
From: Steve Atkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [idn] Why follow IDNA with UTF-8?
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i
In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; from [EMAIL PROTECTED] on Sun,
Jul 15, 2001 at 09:10:03PM -0500

On Sun, Jul 15, 2001 at 09:10:03PM -0500, Eric A. Hall wrote:
> "Adam M. Costello" wrote:
> >
> > Martin Duerst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > But the current IDNA draft explicitly specifies that zone files
must
> > > be in ACE, and therefore prohibits such implementations.
> >
> > Well that's just silly.  Paul and Patrick, the IDNA spec should not
say
> > that master files must use ACE, it should say that DNS servers must
> > accept master files that use ACE and may also accept master files
that
> > use other encodings, like UTF-8.
>
> The format of a master file needs to be agreed on. This is required
for
> DNS to operate properly.

Uhm, no.

Please don't suggest repeating the bind-centric mistakes in the current
set of DNS RFCs.

Master file format is just an implementation detail. It can easily
differ
from one implementation to another.

Cheers,
  Steve


Reply via email to